Cushing primed for playmaking role at inside linebacker (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-3/Cushing-primed-for-playmaking-role-at-inside-linebacker/161ee90c-de83-4892-9899-b714689a2cca)
By Nick Scurfield

For all the talk about Mario Williams this offseason, another key Texans defensive player who’s switching positions seems to be getting overlooked.

His name is Brian Cushing.

The 2009 AP Defensive Rookie of the Year will be the Mike linebacker, inside on the strongside, in the Texans’ 3-4. Linebackers coach Reggie Herring said he thinks that Cushing (6-3, 263) has an “unlimited” ceiling at the position.

“I’ve always dreamed of a Mike linebacker with his stature, his physical stature,” Herring said. “His demeanor is second to none as far as the way he plays on film. He tries to hurt people when he tackles. He’s relentless in his effort. He’s a big, physical guy. He’s going to line up to the tight end side and alls he’s got to come do is run inside-out to the football and control that inside hard-nose run game, and I think he’s a physical matchup for any guard or fullback leading on him.

“If you have instincts and you’re a football player, you can play inside linebacker in our scheme. And that’s what he has. He has instincts, he has size, he can run and hit. And we hopefully now instead of having him outside, we’ll have him inside where he can be in position to make more plays.”

Cushing was a 4-3 outside linebacker in his first two NFL seasons. Playing on the strongside, he led the Texans with 133 tackles as a rookie along with four interceptions and four sacks. He had 76 tackles last season after missing the first four games due to suspension.

The Texans think he’ll be just as productive, if not more, from inside in the 3-4.

“That’s part of putting him in the middle is so he can make a lot of plays,” defensive coordinator Wade Phillips said. “You’ve got a chance to make over 100 tackles from the inside, and with his abilities, we think he can be able to make that. When you put a guy on the side, one side or the other, then they can run away from him. If he’s in the middle, can’t run away from him.”

Phillips likes Cushing’s aggressive demeanor, and he isn’t concerned about a perceived drop-off in Cushing’s play last season.

“I saw the same things in him last year that I saw in his rookie year, which were he is talented, he can run, he’s tough, very physical, he’s athletic,” Phillips said. “All the things you want.”

Cushing will line up next to DeMeco Ryans, who’s moving from the Mike position in the 4-3 to the Mo weak inside position in the 3-4. Ryans and Cushing thrived off one another’s play in 2009, when both made the Pro Bowl and finished as the Texans’ two leading tacklers. They played together for only one-and-a-half games in 2010 before Ryans suffered a season-ending Achilles injury in Week 6.

“The unique part about a 3-4 is you’ve got two guys inside that can make a lot of plays, so it gives you a chance to get a playmaker in a spot where he can make plays,” Phillips said.

Herring is quick to point out that Bradie James led the Dallas Cowboys in tackles in each of the last four seasons from Cushing’s Mike position, and that he led all NFL inside linebackers with eight sacks in 2008.

“We’re going to be bringing him up a lot inside on blitzes,” Herring said of Cushing. “DeMeco as well. Both of them ought to be battling for the leading tackler on the team and the league, and that’s going to be our mentality.

“We feel like (Cushing) rushes the passer actually more effectively, better, up inside with his power and burst and explosion. (He) can present more problems with pass rushing inside.”

Phillips said that Cushing will be doing plenty of that from his new position.

“Oh, yeah,” Phillips said. “(Herring) probably told you, Bradie James had eight sacks one year from the inside. But I just think he’s going to be able to make so many more plays and interceptions and things like that. Putting him in the middle is a key place for him.”

GP

06-05-2011, 01:23 PM

I think Cushing is toast.

His rookie year was fueled by roids, IMO, and someone sue me for that allegation (I could give a rat's ass). In his second year, he didn't look nor play like the rookie year Brian Cushing played...and that, IMO, is because he had been fueled by roids.

He looks timid. He doesn't have the anger and rage and malice toward his opponent. He looks, well...he looks "pedestrian" to me.

I think Mario has a better chance in 2011 than Cushing. I worry that Cushing is going to get stonewalled in the middle and get nowhere; subjected to occupying blockers and never near the action.

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm just being a realist here.

gary

06-05-2011, 01:30 PM

I think this article is largely based on the 2009 Cushing and not 2010 when he had a drop off in play but I am not down on him just yet. This year will be his to shine or not.

steelbtexan

06-05-2011, 02:06 PM

I think this article is largely based on the 2009 Cushing and not 2010 when he had a drop off in play but I am not down on him just yet. This year will be his to shine or not.

Agrred

After missing 4 games it took awhile for Cushing to get back in the swing of things. Then Ryans got hurt, that didn't help. Cushing did seem to be coming around at the end of the season. Tacks/Jags

gary

06-05-2011, 02:14 PM

Agrred

After missing 4 games it took awhile for Cushing to get back in the swing of things. Then Ryans got hurt, that didn't help. Cushing did seem to be coming around at the end of the season. Tacks/Jags
Plus he needs some help back there too.

TexCanada

06-05-2011, 02:29 PM

I think Cushing is toast.

His rookie year was fueled by roids, IMO, and someone sue me for that allegation (I could give a rat's ass). In his second year, he didn't look nor play like the rookie year Brian Cushing played...and that, IMO, is because he had been fueled by roids.

He looks timid. He doesn't have the anger and rage and malice toward his opponent. He looks, well...he looks "pedestrian" to me.

I think Mario has a better chance in 2011 than Cushing. I worry that Cushing is going to get stonewalled in the middle and get nowhere; subjected to occupying blockers and never near the action.

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm just being a realist here.

You deduced all this from the partial year he played split between two different positions?

dinkatoid

06-05-2011, 02:37 PM

I really think that we can not judge last year too much for Cushing. Everyone looks rusty when coming back after 4 games. Then as soon as he came back, they shifted him over to cover for Ryans, and then moved him back a few games later when he did not settle in as quick as they wanted.

On top of all of this, add in that the secondary stopped tackling people and he did not have Ryans beside him to cover him if he got over aggressive and missed, and to me that explains a lot of the timidness and hesitation to hit so hard.

It is also said that production dips the 2nd season in the league, and then should rise some again this season. I am not saying I believe he will be 100% of what he was his rookie year, but I do believe that with Wade's scheme (which is a bit simpler on him, allowing him to be aggressive) and help behind him, we will see Cushing closer to what we expect than what we saw last year.

IDEXAN

06-05-2011, 02:54 PM

I really think that we can not judge last year too much for Cushing. Everyone looks rusty when coming back after 4 games. Then as soon as he came back, they shifted him over to cover for Ryans, and then moved him back a few games later when he did not settle in as quick as they wanted.

On top of all of this, add in that the secondary stopped tackling people and he did not have Ryans beside him to cover him if he got over aggressive and missed, and to me that explains a lot of the timidness and hesitation to hit so hard.

It is also said that production dips the 2nd season in the league, and then should rise some again this season. I am not saying I believe he will be 100% of what he was his rookie year, but I do believe that with Wade's scheme (which is a bit simpler on him, allowing him to be aggressive) and help behind him, we will see Cushing closer to what we expect than what we saw last year.

OK I'll buy that, but if Cushing has a second straight disappointing season you have to promise not to blame it on his conversion to the 3-4 ?

dinkatoid

06-05-2011, 02:56 PM

OK I'll buy that, but if Cushing has a second straight disappointing season you have to promise not to blame it on his conversion to the 3-4 ? disappointing seasonCushings first year in the 3-4

I can agree to this as long as 2 stipulations are met:

1) the lockout does not destroy the majority of the season

2) We give him the full season and do not start judging him 3 games in - even if he starts slow, I am willing to look past that if by the back half the season we are seeing some improvement

False Start

06-05-2011, 03:23 PM

This is the make or break year for him. If he returns to his rookie season form, then I'll believe hes the real deal. If he struggles, even with the new defense being installed, then I'll believe it was the roids. I'm not ready to give up on him yet though.

gary

06-05-2011, 03:46 PM

Is it football season yet?

GP

06-05-2011, 03:50 PM

You deduced all this from the partial year he played split between two different positions?

In theory, he came back more rested than any of the other 32 teams' players who had been playing for four straight weeks while Cushing was NOT. He had been training very heavily all off-season AND the weeks leading up to his re-entry into the 2010 season at Week 5, so this idea of him not benefitting from a four-game absence is not valid to me.

Neither do I accept the theory that the injury to Ryans is a factor in Cushing's slump. Ryans is a guy whom I am on record here as saying that he (Ryans) has not been as big of a LB factor for us as he was in his rookie season, too.

The last factor mentioned is the switch of positions for Cushing. This, to me, is the only factor that I think is a possible reason for a slump.

Look, Brian Cushing played a 12-game season. And a guy on here was saying he looked better towards the END of Cushing's 12-game season? I don't buy it. He should have come out with guns blazing, IMO. Maybe it was the position change, maybe not.

I think Brian Cushing is mortal. I think there was a way he made himself think he wasn't mortal, but it was taken away. And I think roids can alter your psyche and transform more than just muscle/strength.

To me, he is night and day different than the rookie year. Maybe he just was down on himself those 12 games he played in 2010? I don't know. He didn't look the same. We all can admit to that.

DocBar

06-05-2011, 03:53 PM

Cushing doesn't seem to play well when he has to think instead of read and react. Playing him at MLB last season proved that. I'm not counting on a big season from him this year due to changing schemes/position. 2012 should be a monster year for him once he has a full season and offseason at his new position.
I wonder how many players got the playbook during the 10 hrs or so the lockout was lifted?

gary

06-05-2011, 03:55 PM

I have to go with GP on this one.

GP

06-05-2011, 04:03 PM

I have to go with GP on this one.

Yeah, sometimes we have to be realistic instead of hopeful.

At some point, you know what you've got (by having watched plenty of games) and I didn't come away hopeful after watching a hesitant and often-times invisible Brian Cushing in 2010.

The attitude was gone. No fire in the belly. No flexing on his downed opponent after a big hit (because often times there WASN'T a big hit from Cushing), etc., etc. There was an easily noticed drop-off in the sophomore season.

dinkatoid

06-05-2011, 04:06 PM

Cushing doesn't seem to play well when he has to think instead of read and react. Playing him at MLB last season proved that. I'm not counting on a big season from him this year due to changing schemes/position. 2012 should be a monster year for him once he has a full season and offseason at his new position.
I wonder how many players got the playbook during the 10 hrs or so the lockout was lifted?

All it takes is 1. They say that once the lockout was reinstated, the front office can't talk to the players, but nobody can stop the players from sharing the playbook among themselves.

TexCanada

06-06-2011, 12:04 AM

Yeah, sometimes we have to be realistic instead of hopeful.

At some point, you know what you've got (by having watched plenty of games) and I didn't come away hopeful after watching a hesitant and often-times invisible Brian Cushing in 2010.

The attitude was gone. No fire in the belly. No flexing on his downed opponent after a big hit (because often times there WASN'T a big hit from Cushing), etc., etc. There was an easily noticed drop-off in the sophomore season.

Here's the thing though, Cushing has been a very productive player for more then half of his career. I don't really think its realistic to assume that smaller sample is the real Cushing. Obviously we can't assume he'll be back to as good as his rookie season either. So, for now, I'm basically just not going to assume anything. Hopefully the attitude returns under Wade Phillips and the new look D.

Not to mention, great way to speak to Cushing without speaking to him.

powda

06-06-2011, 12:45 PM

Here's the thing though, Cushing has been a very productive player for more then half of his career. I don't really think its realistic to assume that smaller sample is the real Cushing.

Cushing did not have a fast start his rookie year either. His game didnt really start to crank up untill the halway point. Last year he missed the first 4 games, lost his wing man meco, and got bounced around to mike backer. He never had a chance to get in synch.

He plays his best when he dosent have to think. Let him play on instincts.

As far as him playing inside backer on the strong side in a 3-4...I think of that position as the defenses full back. He'll make the play or clear the way for Ryans.

Double Barrel

06-06-2011, 05:49 PM

I just hope he can be like his "overtrained" *wink*wink* self instead of that one that did not "overtrain" *wink*wink*, but without the messy chemical imbalance that seems to come from "overtraining" *wink*wink*. And yes, there is something in my eye. :thinking:

dc_txtech

06-06-2011, 09:20 PM

Well, call me the eternal optimist but I still see loads of potential in Cushing.

His first year he was arguably the best at his position, so for him to return to his rookie form is a lot to ask whether the season was training enhanced or not. If he can play at 85% of his rookie level he is a great starter and a probable pro-bowler.

In his last season he obviously missed some time, was switched between positions twice, only played with Ryans for 1.5 games, and Zac Diles took an obvious step back. With all that said he was still on pace for over 100 tackles and a decent statistical season to boot.

I'm not saying that I didn't see a drop-off in Cushings play last year, I'm just saying that the drop-off was not as big as it's been made out to be, and writing off Cushing this early is downright ignorant.

CloakNNNdagger

06-06-2011, 09:30 PM

Cushing did not have a fast start his rookie year either. His game didnt really start to crank up untill the halway point. Last year he missed the first 4 games, lost his wing man meco, and got bounced around to mike backer. He never had a chance to get in synch.

He plays his best when he dosent have to think. Let him play on instincts.

As far as him playing inside backer on the strong side in a 3-4...I think of that position as the defenses full back. He'll make the play or clear the way for Ryans.

One question that just can't leave me is "How will Cushing play without DeMeco there at full strength or without DeMeco there at all?"

DocBar

06-06-2011, 10:01 PM

One question that just can't leave me is "How will Cushing play without DeMeco there at full strength or without DeMeco there at all?"Cushing might have to bring his big boy pants and be a leader. Is Cush considered a dumb jock? I don't read, I don't write, I play football.

badboy

06-06-2011, 10:28 PM

I think Cushing is toast.

His rookie year was fueled by roids, IMO, and someone sue me for that allegation (I could give a rat's ass). In his second year, he didn't look nor play like the rookie year Brian Cushing played...and that, IMO, is because he had been fueled by roids.

He looks timid. He doesn't have the anger and rage and malice toward his opponent. He looks, well...he looks "pedestrian" to me.

I think Mario has a better chance in 2011 than Cushing. I worry that Cushing is going to get stonewalled in the middle and get nowhere; subjected to occupying blockers and never near the action.

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm just being a realist here.

This is my concern & wonder which Cushing we will get. Moving him last season was harmful. Maybe if Ryans remains healthy, it will benefit Cush.

House of Pain

06-07-2011, 05:50 AM

I think Cushing is a classic, USC-bred, front-runner. Cushing will light people up if the defense is playing well and he has a clear identity on it. However, if the defense struggles, he'll zone out and spend more of his time thinking that he'd rather be tanning, and having that weekly visit to the clinic from banging leather-skinned, smokey voiced skanks on the New Jersey Boardwalk.

Or I could be wrong!

beerlover

06-07-2011, 12:51 PM

I think Cushing is a classic, USC-bred, front-runner. Cushing will light people up if the defense is playing well and he has a clear identity on it. However, if the defense struggles, he'll zone out and spend more of his time thinking that he'd rather be tanning, and having that weekly visit to the clinic from banging leather-skinned, smokey voiced skanks on the New Jersey Boardwalk.

The only thing he enforced last year was that he couldn't produce at the same level without roids. He's got to prove himself now, and last year didn't help.

beerlover

06-07-2011, 02:34 PM

The only thing he enforced last year was that he couldn't produce at the same level without roids. He's got to prove himself now, and last year didn't help.

give it a rest, the entire D was terrible. Cushing missed first four games, by then the defense, already depleted, was in flux & disarray. So many players out of position, including Cushing it wasn't even funny. Scheme wise Bush had no clue how to reassemble players & was grasping @ straws hence he was fired as Defensive Coordinator.

I think you're right, to a degree. And the degree that I am talking about is the overall impact roids had on how much it helped him become that type of blue collar enforcer.

I think he has an inner drive and a passion for football that a guy like, oh I'll say Amobi Okoye, doesn't seem to present on a consistent basis. However, Cushing has had warning signs for like forever and stuff.

I just think a lot of who he "was" is rooted in enhancements that have impacted his physical side AND his emotional/mental side. It certainly looks to me, as I watched him in his 16-game rookie year and then in his 12-game season in 2010 that he was missing something out there on the field.

Some allege it was 'Meco's injury. Other say it was the switch to MLB. Others say he's a late starter and a 4-game layoff hurt him. I say it was the obvious answer and therefore "none of the above."

I'l be watching. If the tape for 2011 looks like 2011? Ouch.

CloakNNNdagger

06-07-2011, 09:34 PM

I think you're right, to a degree. And the degree that I am talking about is the overall impact roids had on how much it helped him become that type of blue collar enforcer.

I think he has an inner drive and a passion for football that a guy like, oh I'll say Amobi Okoye, doesn't seem to present on a consistent basis. However, Cushing has had warning signs for like forever and stuff.

I just think a lot of who he "was" is rooted in enhancements that have impacted his physical side AND his emotional/mental side. It certainly looks to me, as I watched him in his 16-game rookie year and then in his 12-game season in 2010 that he was missing something out there on the field.

Some allege it was 'Meco's injury. Other say it was the switch to MLB. Others say he's a late starter and a 4-game layoff hurt him. I say it was the obvious answer and therefore "none of the above."

I'l be watching. If the tape for 2011 looks like 2011? Ouch.

Lord help him if we indeed end up with only an 8 game season!

badboy

06-07-2011, 10:56 PM

I think Cushing is a classic, USC-bred, front-runner. Cushing will light people up if the defense is playing well and he has a clear identity on it. However, if the defense struggles, he'll zone out and spend more of his time thinking that he'd rather be tanning, and having that weekly visit to the clinic from banging leather-skinned, smokey voiced skanks on the New Jersey Boardwalk.

Or I could be wrong!You are wrong. He is a blue collar lunch pail type guy who added big time to the defense. He quickly won Demeco over.

badboy

06-07-2011, 11:00 PM

I think you're right, to a degree. And the degree that I am talking about is the overall impact roids had on how much it helped him become that type of blue collar enforcer.

I think he has an inner drive and a passion for football that a guy like, oh I'll say Amobi Okoye, doesn't seem to present on a consistent basis. However, Cushing has had warning signs for like forever and stuff.

I just think a lot of who he "was" is rooted in enhancements that have impacted his physical side AND his emotional/mental side. It certainly looks to me, as I watched him in his 16-game rookie year and then in his 12-game season in 2010 that he was missing something out there on the field.

Some allege it was 'Meco's injury. Other say it was the switch to MLB. Others say he's a late starter and a 4-game layoff hurt him. I say it was the obvious answer and therefore "none of the above."

I'l be watching. If the tape for 2011 looks like 2011? Ouch.Not to be technical but I thought the violation was for a non-steroidal substance? I'm leaning more to what Beerlover said. More the perfect storm that sunk more than just Cushing. Heavy emphasis on Bush.

DocBar

06-08-2011, 01:14 AM

Not to be technical but I thought the violation was for a non-steroidal substance? I'm leaning more to what Beerlover said. More the perfect storm that sunk more than just Cushing. Heavy emphasis on Bush.Bush was his DC in Cush's rookie season. I lean more towards missing 4 games and playing 4 more out of position. Cush plays better when he just gets after it more so than when he has to think.

Double Barrel

06-08-2011, 12:14 PM

Not to be technical but I thought the violation was for a non-steroidal substance?

It's a substance typically used by athletes in cycling steroid use. There is no solid medical reason why this substance would be elevated in his body, and all of his excuses were clearly bogus when he never provided even one professional medical opinion to back up his claims.

It is what it is: Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor) in effect.

GP

06-08-2011, 12:28 PM

It's a substance typically used by athletes in cycling steroid use. There is no solid medical reason why this substance would be elevated in his body, and all of his excuses were clearly bogus when he never provided even one professional medical opinion to back up his claims.

It is what it is: Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor) in effect.

Yep.

I saw a bird fly over my head. Next thing I know, I have a blob of pigeon poop on my head. Did an alien put it there? Of course not. The bird did. I even did a taste test, and it confirmed my theory.

Dude was a roider. Now he's not. Now you see him, now you don't.

infantrycak

06-08-2011, 12:29 PM

Not to be technical but I thought the violation was for a non-steroidal substance?

It was hcg. It is not a steroid, not a performance enhancer and is not a steroid masking agent. As DB said it is on the banned list as being often used in connection with steroids. It is used to stimulate testosterone production (and keep the marbles from getting too small). So it is typically used after a steroid cycle. Looking at the timing of all the testing it seems likely Cushing used during college and then got busted in the NFL worrying about his package. I'd say people are reading far too much into thinking his rookie year was not him.

badboy

06-09-2011, 03:31 PM

It was hcg. It is not a steroid, not a performance enhancer and is not a steroid masking agent. As DB said it is on the banned list as being often used in connection with steroids. It is used to stimulate testosterone production (and keep the marbles from getting too small). So it is typically used after a steroid cycle. Looking at the timing of all the testing it seems likely Cushing used during college and then got busted in the NFL worrying about his package. I'd say people are reading far too much into thinking his rookie year was not him.This is what I remembered. Thanks for clearing up. Sounds like strong "circumstantial" evidence. Substance was banned but not steroidal.

Under Phillips I am looking forward to a better Cushing.

CloakNNNdagger

06-09-2011, 05:58 PM

It was hcg. It is not a steroid, not a performance enhancer and is not a steroid masking agent. As DB said it is on the banned list as being often used in connection with steroids. It is used to stimulate testosterone production (and keep the marbles from getting too small). So it is typically used after a steroid cycle. Looking at the timing of all the testing it seems likely Cushing used during college and then got busted in the NFL worrying about his package. I'd say people are reading far too much into thinking his rookie year was not him.

That was a good and accurate summary of “the events.” There is one thing that I would want to point out. Anabolic steroids will help develop muscle mass and strength above and beyond their “natural” potential. And it will produce these increases quicker. However, it is much more difficult to INCREASE muscle mass and muscle strength than it is to MAINTAIN it. If anabolic steroids are discontinued and so is the vigorous exercise regimen which accompanied it, then the muscle mass and strength can be lost over a relatively short period of time. The strength is lost quicker than the mass. If the vigorous exercise regimen is not discontinued, then the muscle mass and strength decreased can be slowed substantially. But ultimately there will be a noticeable decrease, usually accompanied by a noticeable decrease in different aspects of performance. In fact, this ultimate loss of muscle mass, strength and performance can be delayed by as much as 1 to 2 years following the discontinuance of the anabolic steroids. Examining the timeline, it is not unlikely that Cushing could have maintained a good portion of his anabolic gains during the course of his rookie year.

DocBar

06-09-2011, 07:02 PM

That was a good and accurate summary of “the events.” There is one thing that I would want to point out. Anabolic steroids will help develop muscle mass and strength above and beyond their “natural” potential. And it will produce these increases quicker. However, it is much more difficult to INCREASE muscle mass and muscle strength than it is to MAINTAIN it. If anabolic steroids are discontinued and so is the vigorous exercise regimen which accompanied it, then the muscle mass and strength can be lost over a relatively short period of time. The strength is lost quicker than the mass. If the vigorous exercise regimen is not discontinued, then the muscle mass and strength decreased can be slowed substantially. But ultimately there will be a noticeable decrease, usually accompanied by a noticeable decrease in different aspects of performance. In fact, this ultimate loss of muscle mass, strength and performance can be delayed by as much as 1 to 2 years following the discontinuance of the anabolic steroids. Examining the timeline, it is not unlikely that Cushing could have maintained a good portion of his anabolic gains during the course of his rookie year.I guess he could legitimately claim to have "over trained" by trying to slow down the process. I knew he wasn't lying.:kubepalm:

GP

06-10-2011, 03:18 PM

That was a good and accurate summary of “the events.” There is one thing that I would want to point out. Anabolic steroids will help develop muscle mass and strength above and beyond their “natural” potential. And it will produce these increases quicker. However, it is much more difficult to INCREASE muscle mass and muscle strength than it is to MAINTAIN it. If anabolic steroids are discontinued and so is the vigorous exercise regimen which accompanied it, then the muscle mass and strength can be lost over a relatively short period of time. The strength is lost quicker than the mass. If the vigorous exercise regimen is not discontinued, then the muscle mass and strength decreased can be slowed substantially. But ultimately there will be a noticeable decrease, usually accompanied by a noticeable decrease in different aspects of performance. In fact, this ultimate loss of muscle mass, strength and performance can be delayed by as much as 1 to 2 years following the discontinuance of the anabolic steroids. Examining the timeline, it is not unlikely that Cushing could have maintained a good portion of his anabolic gains during the course of his rookie year.

We need to drag up the two photos that gary (OUR gary, the guy who posts on here) posted of Cushing from his rookie year and then from last year.

gary posted two photos, and the comparison was alarming.

Any of you guys remember that thread? I do. The two images are seared into my mind. It's the same guy...sort of.

Double Barrel

06-10-2011, 03:53 PM

We need to drag up the two photos that gary (OUR gary, the guy who posts on here) posted of Cushing from his rookie year and then from last year.

gary posted two photos, and the comparison was alarming.

Any of you guys remember that thread? I do. The two images are seared into my mind. It's the same guy...sort of.

If you type "brian cushing before after" into Google, this is what you get:

These are not the pics that gary posted, but I don't remember seeing the above comparison shots.

Just so that people can put a timeline to the pictures.

This picture was taken during his senior year in HS in the summer of 2004.

http://flashwarner.com/images/cushingrecruit.JPG

*************************
The pic below right was taken around July 2006 following surgery for a dislocated shoulder. The surgery occurred was performed immediately at the beginning of the offseason following the 2005 season.

The pic bottom right was taken during his senior season when all of the steroid allegations were ramped up even moreso as compared to those that had persistently followed him in the past.